SG:AC discussions

4 posts ยท Sep 23 2014 to Sep 25 2014

From: Tony Wilkinson <twilko@o...>

Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 09:46:51 +1000

Subject: Re: SG:AC discussions

Gday All,

My only real contribution to make is to say that whatever scale you design the
rules for, lets say 15mm, that it could be easily resized to
25/28mm and 5mm so that people like myself who have heavily invested in
your wonderful products at those scales, yes I have no GZG 15mm stuff, can
still use the rules which we are likely to get.

There's my 2 cents worth.

Tony.

> On 24/09/2014 4:51 AM, Ground Zero Games wrote:

From: Tony Wilkinson <twilko@o...>

Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 07:50:46 +1000

Subject: Re: SG:AC discussions

> On 25/09/2014 6:54 PM, Roger Bell_West wrote:
One of the things that was odd and very fun, usually, abut first edition

40K was that the army lists were semi random. You paid points for the
type of squad and then rolled up any special gear/weapons. It meant that

your heavy support squad might have 4 heavy bolters (machine guns) and no
rocket launches or your sargent paid points for grenades and usually
got HE, might get krak (AT) or even occassionally the uber powerful/fun
vortex grenade.

So my suggestion would be fixed organisation at platoon level for a
company based game (with points) then randomised special/support
equipment that are paid for then rolled up.

Ok so now I am up for 4 cents.

From: Pat Connaughton <patconnaughton@e...>

Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 17:06:01 -0500

Subject: RE: SG:AC discussions

Very good points. Hadn't thought it through.....

Patrick Connaughton

"Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival"-W. Edwards Deming
E-mail - ptconn@earthlink.net
Skype - j.patrick.connaughton

[quoted original message omitted]

From: John Tailby <john_tailby@x...>

Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 15:44:21 -0700

Subject: RE: SG:AC discussions

Random equipment creates problems for players. If you buy a suppoort weapon
detachment and it can either be AT missiles, machine guns or motars you either
need all 3 different types of units for each detachment which player will find
expensive OR you have models that are so generic that they are unrecognisable
as anything specific so players use the same models.

Imagine if you rolled for a tank platoon and you had to cover options from 2 T
80 3 T 72 4 T 64
5 T 34/85

Suddenly peoples model cost would just of out of control. Either then you
would need to make it a "if you have the models option" in which case people
would just have the moels they wanted and the random element would go away..

I can see random elements for motivation and training working because those
don't impact model costs.

--------------------------------------------
 On 25/09/2014 6:54 PM, Roger
> Bell_West wrote:
proving how much smarter they are than the people who put a
 lot of
> effort into designing
standard organisations can go a long way to covering up the
 cracks in
> a point system. If your NAC
One of the things that was odd and very fun, usually, abut first edition 40K
was that the army lists were semi random. You paid points for the type of
squad and
 then rolled up any special gear/weapons. It meant that
your heavy support squad might have 4 heavy bolters (machine guns) and
 no rocket
launches or your sargent paid points for grenades and
 usually
got HE, might get krak (AT) or even
 occassionally the uber powerful/fun
 vortex
grenade.

So my suggestion would be fixed organisation at platoon level for a company
based game (with points) then
 randomised special/support
equipment that are paid for then rolled up.

Ok so now I am up for 4 cents.